HabitatReporter, thanks for the response from attorney Eric Goidel. While Mr. Goidel is certainly correct that the authority for any late charges must be in the Proprietary Lease -- or an amendment to the lease approved by the required percentage of shareholders -- the original poster said from the start that his lease *did* have such a clause: "Our late fee is outlined in the prop lease as being based on a maximum legal rate of interest (16% or 1.5% a month)."

The poster then went on to explain his board's twisted *interpretation* of this clause: namely, that 5% per month was somehow equivalent to (or less than!) 16% per year, and was therefore permitted by the current lease without amending it. That's just crazy, and provably false.

Also, even if that coop managed to get a super-majority to approve a lease amendment stating that interest on overdue balances was 60% per year, I can't imagine that it would be enforceable in any state with laws against usury. As far as I know, laws invariably trump the lease in case of a conflict. For example, the portions of the standard "Use of Premises" clause (Paragraph 14 in many leases) that conflict with the Roommate Law are not enforceable. You *can* have a roommate, regardless of what the lease says.